https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331076 The case involved challenges to the jurisdiction assumed under sec. 153A and the addition of Rs. 3,21,000 as an unexplained source of investment in cash. The ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction under sec. 153A and that the addition was not justified based solely on the hard disc without corroborative evidence. The ITAT allowed the appeal, concluding that the additions made by the authorities were not sustainable. en-us Thu, 30 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:20:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331076 The case involved challenges to the jurisdiction assumed under sec. 153A and the addition of Rs. 3,21,000 as an unexplained source of investment in cash. The ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction under sec. 153A and that the addition was not justified based solely on the hard disc without corroborative evidence. The ITAT allowed the appeal, concluding that the additions made by the authorities were not sustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331076